9 thoughts on “Tree Triptych”

The use of triptych is so classic that when I came across this post on my phone checking Twitter, “Art” was the first word that popped into my mind. Meanwhile you answered a question I popped in the “Then there were three” post: Sunny 16.

Thank you Joseph, that is a very gratifying comment. I don’t aspire to art, just to take interesting photographs. i know some artists – the intellectual effort that goes into their work is not what I am doing or even capable of in my circumstances. Even so, if you have found this interesting and art, then I am very pleased.

This is a very interesting series that you’ve got going here. I like this one quite a bit, especially the progression from a complete person, to a half-person, to no person. I like the exposure, too – I have a fondness for photos that tend toward the darker side of the scale.

Thanks Melinda! I was pleased with how it came out, and the exposure too. I wish I could remember exactly what I did on that front – but that would mean pencil and paper to add to the vintage film experience. Seems too retro even for an old dog.

Thanks Ken. The visualising part is the hardest bit, and there is some accidents in this sequence which kind of evolved during the making.
I was out for lunch and saw this shadow, so I stopped and took a picture of it without anyone in it. Then I walked around for while, took some other pics but this shadow kept on popping up in my thoughts. So I went back to it.

I took another shot without anyone which is the shot to the right. But while waiting for people to pass, admired their shadows, and so I decided to add one with a shadow but I really wanted one with just a person’s shadow. Everyone was walking too close to the wall, so I though maybe take the picture just as a person walks out of frame. But I am getting more in frame than I thought, and so that is the middle picture, with someone popping out of the frame, which I was not aiming for, but thought might happen. The left most shot I added as a more balanced composition on its own, hoping it might work, but also aiming for a single frame because I really liked the effect.
When I looked at the negatives I realised this one was going to work a lot better if I flipped it, which is why it goes from right to left when the film loads from left to right. But that too is a cool lesson, to keep in mind the possibilities of flipping these shots as it could make a difference in taking them in the first place.

The exposure worked out very well, but I think a bit lucky. I used the Sunny 16 rule, but this was one of the shortest days of the year and likely there was 1 stop or so less light for a sunny day, which ended up just right for emphasizing the shadows without losing too much in the rest of it. Also, there must have been a bit of moving cloud, or my shutter is a bit unreliable, because the first shot seems like it might be about 1 stop different – I don’t recall adjusting the exposure mid sequence.